Morning all,
Following on from a previous thread I'm struggling to find any decent winter boots/shoes in a wider fitting within budget.
My current riding shoes are some old Shimano DX Spd which are a bit tight when trying to wear winter or neoprene socks.
So far I've tried:
Shimano MW7 in euro 45 and 46. 45 was decent in length but not very wide. 46 was just too long.
Lake MX146 in wide. Although labelled as wide they done feel any roomier in the toe box and with winter socks feel slightly more restrictive.
What other can I look at? I suffer really badly with numb feet in the cold and wet due to circulation issues.
I've got a budget of £250 max for a decent pair to last a while.
I'm not sure if I need just a waterproof boot I can layer socks in or a fully insulated boot?
Any ideas?
Nothing from Lake is actually wide enough for me, but the MX242 'flap' shoes at least have space for my feet to bulge out the sides. I use them in winter with insulated, waterproof overshoes.
I ordered these and they are the best bit of winter kit I own. I've not finished a winter ride with wet or cold feet since I got them. My feet are like slabs and I got a great fit. Salt dog(Richard) rang me to go through how to measure my feet correctly so I got the sizing correct.
I was disappointed with the lake "wide" winter boots, my specialised defroster in size 49 are roomier than the lake wide size 50 (which certainly isn't the case for other specialised vs lake wide shoes I have tried).
Lake do do a "comfort last" winter boot though, the MXZ120, I have tried the "comfort last" mtb shoes and was disappointed in them as a summer MTB shoe, but they are definitely roomier and f you have a specific problem the winter boot could be the solution.
I ordered these and they are the best bit of winter kit I own. I've not finished a winter ride with wet or cold feet since I got them. My feet are like slabs and I got a great fit. Salt dog(Richard) rang me to go through how to measure my feet correctly so I got the sizing correct.
I've got a pair in front of me and they don't overly wide to be honest. My toes feel fine but with winter socks they feel quite tight even with the looser.
I went through the fitting guide with Rich and to be fair he had tried to phone me a couple of times right after I'd sent him an email.
I wonder if the MXZ120 would be better?
I wonder if the MXZ120 would be better?
They will be wider, much wider, but the trade off is weight and "clumpiness" so it will be a trade off, I think they will be worth a try, just send them back if you try them on and don't like them.
Perhaps another option might be to look at something from 45nrth I have seen comments that they are quite wide, although I also have seen comments that northwave are wide so some people don't really know what having wide feet means.
I bought a pair of Lake MXZ304* wide in a 48 - I wear a 46.5 wide in my regular Lake shoes (MX238).
I read quite a lot online about Lake not having accounted for the extra thickness of the insulation in their winter boots, meaning they are smaller inside than the shoes, which could be internet BS, but then Salt Dog do recommend sizing up. So maybe send your Lakes back and size up again if no-one else has a better suggestion.
*only worn in the house, not actually used them yet due to buying them just as the weather warmed up - got them under half price which was nice because they are very pricey.
I'm surprised that Lake don't fit the bill, I have some gravel shoes in a wide fit and they're spot on. Maybe it's the insulation as above.
I'd say definitely not Northwave. I had to size up to get the width and I've never been that happy with the fit. Do Shimano still do a wide fit?
I'm a year into Lake MXZ120 and really like them. A bit clumpy but the width means space for thicker socks without sizing up. I did all the measuring thing with Richard and would say they are pretty true to size. I'm size 43 length in them, normal shoes and Shimano MW5 (but Shimano are way too narrow). At most just go up half a size.
Stock looks very low at Salt Dog so worth giving Richard a call to see what the deal is.
They dry overnight in a gentle airing cupboard but don't put them on direct heat as proper leather.
Flat original laces are junk. Fitted some "Ironlaces" which make them much quicker to get on / off and don't break, stretch or soak up water.
I'm a year into Lake MXZ120 and really like them. A bit clumpy but the width means space for thicker socks without sizing up. I did all the measuring thing with Richard and would say they are pretty true to size. I'm size 43 length in them, normal shoes and Shimano MW5 (but Shimano are way too narrow). At most just go up half a size.
Stock looks very low at Salt Dog so worth giving Richard a call to see what the deal is.
They dry overnight in a gentle airing cupboard but don't put them on direct heat as proper leather.
Flat original laces are junk. Fitted some "Ironlaces" which make them much quicker to get on / off and don't break, stretch or soak up water.
Thanks Mick.
Do you have any experience of the other Lake shoes?
How waterproof are the MXZ120?
+1 MXZ 304. Measure your feet and then speak to the extremely helpful Richard at Salt Dog.
i bought some mx169 this year after years of shoes too narrow.
they are indeed a very wide fit and very comfy too.
they are not a winter shoes but with some silk liners and some sealskins they will see me through a british winter.
I tried MX146 locally which were too short (43 wide). Then bought MX146 (44 wide) at the same time as the MXZ120 (43) to keep whichever I preferred. 146 fit was good and more mud wipeable but the 120s were in a different league of comfort. 146 definitely run smaller than the size suggests.
The 120s are waterproof but not perfect in that respect. It isn't a bellows tongue so a well aimed river splash can get through. Similarly water can quickly come down the top. So not an all day ride in the rain shoe. If they did a waterproof lace cover and extended top cuff they would be perfect.